7th Report – Assessing Value, Ensuring Impact: The FCDO's Approach to Value for Money in Official Development Assistance
Select Committee
International Development Committee
HC 422
29 October 2025
Government response
8th Special Report: Assessing Value, Ensuring Impact: The FCDO’s Approach to Value for Money in Official Development Assistance: Government Response · published 11 Feb 2026
Recommendations & Conclusions
15 results
1
Conclusion
Rejected
Limited public information and guidance on FCDO's value for money approach concerning equity.
Conclusion
DFID was a global leader in its approach to value for money (VfM), and the Committee are pleased to hear that some of the core foundations of DFID’s framework have transferred into the FCDO. However, it is concerning that there …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the concern, stating that its Programme Operating Framework (PrOF) and internal PrOF Guides already provide rules and guidance on Value for Money (VfM). It plans to update existing guidance, share good examples, and roll out VfM training for staff instead of creating a new strategy.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
2
Conclusion
Rejected
Publish a clear strategy and framework for FCDO’s approach to Value for Money.
Conclusion
The FCDO must publish a clear strategy and framework regarding its approach to VfM, as had previously been done by DFID and other Government departments. This should include: a. A clear definition of VfM; b. The FCDO’s core VfM principles; …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation to publish a new, clear Value for Money (VfM) strategy and framework. It asserts that existing documents like the Programme Operating Framework (PrOF) and PrOF Guides already cover these aspects, and it will focus on updating this existing guidance.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
8
Conclusion
Rejected
Reducing ODA to 0.3% will have devastating consequences, undermining UK soft power and security.
Conclusion
The UK’s planned reduction of ODA spend from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income will have devastating consequences across the world. The Committee recognises that increased defence spending is needed and is to be welcomed. However, to do this …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the conclusion, reiterating its commitment to returning to 0.7% ODA when fiscal circumstances allow, based on OBR forecasts, and notes these conditions are not met within this Parliament.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
9
Conclusion
Rejected
Repeated UK aid budget cuts damage reputation and hinder long-term Value for Money.
Conclusion
Guaranteed, long-term funding for programmes is essential for ensuring that VfM is achieved, and that the impact of FCDO work continues to be felt long after the end of a programme. In the last five years, the UK has significantly …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the conclusion, reiterating its commitment to returning to 0.7% ODA when fiscal circumstances allow, based on OBR forecasts, and notes these conditions are not met within this Parliament.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
10
Recommendation
Rejected
Require Government to return ODA spending to 0.5% GNI with a clear rebuilding schedule.
Recommendation
The Government must make every effort to return to spending 0.5% of GNI on ODA at a minimum, as soon as possible. The Government should produce a clear schedule for rebuilding aid from the interim level of 0.3%, with defined …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly rejects the recommendation to return to 0.5% ODA, stating its commitment is to 0.7% when fiscal circumstances allow, and notes these conditions are not expected to be met within this Parliament.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
12
Conclusion
Rejected
High in-country refugee costs are disproportionately classified as ODA, diverting funds from global poor.
Conclusion
The Committee notes the continuing badging of high levels of Government spending on refugee costs within the UK as ODA with dismay. Whilst the Spending Review commits to ending the use of asylum hotels in this Parliament, the level of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees, stating the FCDO's ODA budget is no longer automatically exposed to in-donor refugee costs and that measures are being taken to reduce asylum costs to ensure more ODA can be spent on overseas development.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
13
Conclusion
Rejected
Excessive in-donor refugee spend, especially hotel costs, contravenes ODA's development spirit.
Conclusion
Whilst the Committee recognises that in-donor refugee spend is allowable under DAC rules, in a world of rapidly decreasing aid budgets it is not in the spirit of what ODA should be used for, which per the OECD is spending …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees, stating that the FCDO's ODA budget is no longer automatically exposed to in-donor refugee costs and measures are being taken to reduce these costs, thereby allowing more ODA for overseas development.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
14
Recommendation
Rejected
Cap Home Office in-donor refugee costs at a fixed percentage of total ODA.
Recommendation
The Government should consider that Home Office in-donor refugee costs should be capped at a fixed percentage of total ODA spend to protect a rapidly diminishing envelope of funding. This should include formal review points if projections breach 80% of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly rejects the recommendation for a cap on Home Office in-donor refugee costs, stating the FCDO's ODA budget is no longer automatically exposed and measures are in place to reduce asylum costs.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
15
Conclusion
Rejected
Require HM Treasury to reallocate all future unspent ODA back to the FCDO.
Conclusion
The FCDO must make formal representation to HM Treasury that any unspent ODA allocated to other Government departments is channelled back through the FCDO to continue its vital humanitarian and development work, and to ensure that overall ODA spending does …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation, explaining that ODA Department Expenditure Limit totals will no longer be adjusted for GNI fluctuations, meaning the FCDO's budget is no longer automatically exposed to other department's spending, thus providing greater predictability.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
16
Conclusion
Rejected
FCDO's leadership position offers opportunity for consistent ODA value for money framework.
Conclusion
VfM approaches differ between Government departments, including in relation to ODA spend. The Minister’s announcement that the FCDO have been granted a greater leadership position in the way that ODA is spent across Whitehall is an opportunity for the FCDO …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the premise that the FCDO should exert leadership over other departments' ODA spend, stating that individual departmental Secretaries of State remain accountable, and the Minister for Development already provides cross-government oversight.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
17
Conclusion
Rejected
Mandate FCDO's value for money framework for all ODA spending with formal FCDO oversight.
Conclusion
Achieving VfM for every pound of ODA is now more vital than ever, and it is essential that one consistent framework is applied across all aid spending. Given that the FCDO is the largest administrator of ODA, its published framework, …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with applying one consistent VfM framework across all aid spending and formal oversight by the FCDO's Second Permanent Under-Secretary, stating that departmental Secretaries of State are individually accountable for their department's spending.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
28
Conclusion
Rejected
FCDO faces potential loss of in-house expertise due to long-term private contractor engagement.
Conclusion
We are concerned about the potential loss of expertise within the FCDO as a result of engagement with private contractors, particularly where contracts have been ongoing for many years, where in-house expertise could have instead been used. (Conclusion, Paragraph 90)
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the committee's concern, stating that existing robust governance, performance reviews, and contract management processes already provide sufficient oversight and accountability, thereby preventing loss of expertise.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
29
Conclusion
Rejected
Perform audit of FCDO private contractor engagements exceeding 12 months, assessing performance alignment.
Conclusion
The FCDO should perform an audit of all individual private contractor engagement longer than 12 months or approaching renewal. This must assess whether extended tenures align with performance outcomes and original mandates, with findings with clear recommendations for terminations or …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation for an audit, stating that existing robust governance, performance reviews, and contract management processes already provide sufficient oversight and accountability, making additional audits unnecessary.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
35
Conclusion
Rejected
Previous ODA reductions detrimentally impacted FCDO's vital Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning budget.
Conclusion
As a global leader in promoting VfM across development spending, it is vital that the FCDO protects its MEL budget. MEL should not be optional; it is a core function that underpins effective, accountable and adaptive programming. Without appropriate and …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the implied recommendation to protect MEL budgets or ringfence MEL spend. They state that ringfencing is inappropriate as FCDO needs flexibility to prioritise resources, though they remain committed to proportionate and strategic MEL and will make monitoring mandatory.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details
36
Conclusion
Rejected
Ringfence Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning spend within programme budgets to protect accountability and impact.
Conclusion
It is essential that the FCDO ringfences MEL spend within programme budgets and protects these throughout the reduction of ODA to 0.3% of GNI. Further cuts to MEL threaten to undermine the very assessments that sustain the accountability and impact …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation to ringfence MEL spend within programme budgets, stating it is not appropriate in the current fiscal landscape as FCDO requires flexibility to prioritise resources. They remain committed to proportionate and strategic MEL.
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
View Details